MUCI1692 Q. Mucius (22) P. f. P. n. Scaevola 'Pontifex'


  • Nobilis Expand

    Cic. Rab. Perd. 7.21, Liv. Per. 86

Life Dates

  • 140?, birth (Rüpke 2005)
  • 82, death - violent (Broughton MRR II) Expand

    Executed by Brutus Damasippus.


son of
P. Mucius (17) P. f. Q. n. Scaevola (cos. 133) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Cic. de orat. I 170, Cic. off. I 116, Cic. off. III 62, Gell. XVII 7.3

father of
P. Mucius (18) Q. f. P. n. Scaevola Cordus (pont. 70) (RE)
Mucia (28) Tertia (daughter of Q. Mucius (22) P. f. P. n. Scaevola 'Pontifex' (cos. 95)) (Zmeskal 2009) Expand

Asc. Scaur. 19C


  • Pontifex Maximus? 115 to 83 (Rüpke 2005) Expand
    • Q. Mucius Scaevola succeeded Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus as pontifex maximus. Cic. Leg. 2.47 and 52-53; ND 3.80; Olf. 3.70; Varro LL 5.83; Diod. 38.17; Vell. 2.26.2; Ascon. 67C; App. BC 1.88; Gell. 5.19.6; Pompon. Dig.; Augustin. CD 4.27; 3.28-29; Pontifex, Cic. Top. 29; Lael. 1; Ascon. 14C; Flor. 2.9.21. (Broughton MRR II)
  • Pontifex? 115 to 83 (Rüpke 2005) Expand
    • Q. Mucius Scaevola succeeded P. Mucius Scaevola as pontifex. L. Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus succeeded P. Mucius Scaevola as pontifex maximus. See 114, and 89, Pontifices. (Broughton MRR I)
  • Quaestor before 108 (Broughton MRR I) Expand
    • A colleague of Crassus in all magistracies except the tribunate and the censorship (Cic. Brut. 161). (Broughton MRR I)
  • Tribunus Plebis 106 (Broughton MRR I) Expand
    • Presided as Tribune at a meeting where Crassus spoke in support of the Servilian law (Cic. Brut. 161). (Broughton MRR I)
    • p. 257-63 (Thommen 1989)
  • Aedilis Curulis before 99 (Broughton MRR I) Expand
    • They put on magnificent games (Cic. Off. 2.57; Verr. 2.4.133; Plin. NH 8.53, with mention of Scaevola as Curule Aedile; 17.6, on Crassus). As they were colleagues in all magistracies except the Tribunate of the Plebs (Cic. Brut. 161), Crassus was probably a Curule Aedile too. The date lies between 105 and 100. (Broughton MRR I)
  • Praetor before 97 Asia? (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • 2 This is the latest possible date in view of the date of his consulship. Balsdon has shown (CR 51 [1937] 8-10) that the phrase in Asconius, provinciam ..... deposuerat (15 C), refers to his consulship, when his colleague Crassus was demanding a triumph, and means not that he left his province, which would demand the verb decedere, but that he refused at that time to go to a province at all. Magie in his important recent work, Roman Rule in Asia Minor (2.1064, note 47) returns to the view that Scaevola's governorship of Asia followed his consulship, since otherwise the interval between the acts of Scaevola's Legate, Rutilius Rufus, and his prosecution in 92 would be inexplicably long. The interval however was greater in the case of C. Norbanus (see 103, Tribunes of the Plebs), and of C. Antonius (see 84, Prefects, and 76 Praetors, on M. Lucullus). The balance of political factors in Rome may well have had much to do with the date of the trial of Rutilius. It is unlikely that Scaevola assumed command of Asia during the year of his praetorship, for he remained in his province only nine months (Cic. Att. 5.17.5), and his title while there was Proconsul (Liv. Per. 70; cf. OGIS 437 and 439; see 97, Promagistrates). (Broughton MRR II)
    • p. 746, footnote 253 (Brennan 2000)
  • Proconsul 97 Asia (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Proconsul in Asia (OGIS 437, 439; Liv. Per. 70; cf. Diod. 37.5.1 and 6; Ps.-Ascon. 202 Stangl). He sternly punished and suppressed the abuses of the publicans in the collection of taxes, and earned the reputation of a model governor (Cic. Att. 5.17.5; 6.1.15; Div. in Caec. 57; Verr. 2.2.27 and 51; 2.3.209; Planc. 33; Diod. 37.5.1- 4; Liv. Per. 70; Val. Max. 8.15.6; Dio 28, fr. 97.1; Schol. Bob. 158 Stangl; Ps.Ascon. 202 and 262 Stangl), but drew the hatred of the knights upon himself and his Legate Rutilius Rufus (Cic. Planc. 33; Fam. 1.9.26; see below, Legates). The provincials honored him with an annual festival (OGIS 437-439; Cic. Verr. 2.2.51; Ps.- Ascon. 202 and 262 Stangl). (Broughton MRR II)
    • 5 The tradition regarding Scaevola's title in Diodorus and Ps-Asconius (Praetor) is inexact. On the dates of his praetorship and his proconsulate, see 98, note 2. (Broughton MRR II)
    • n Athenaeum 34, 1956, 104-123, Badian had argued strongly in favor of 94, the year after his consulate, rather than 97, the year after his praetorship, for his proconsulate in Asia, pointing out (with Münzer) how unlikely it is that an elderly consular, Rutilius, would serve as legatus under a praetorian governor. He holds that Mucius was a special consular appointment to meet a crisis in the province, that the situation in Rome was favorable to prompt action to try Rutilius (condemned in 92) upon his return, and that a date in 94 makes the pattern of political development during the decade more intelligible. These are important points. Yet the uses of the phrase deponere provinciam (Ascon. 15C; cf. Cic. Phil. 11.23) seem to favor the view that Mucius did renounce a province, and the question remains whether the text of Asconius, with the pluperfect deposuerat, as a whole refers primarily to his consulship or may refer back several years to his praetorship. He could have renounced his province early in his year as consul and have vetoed Crassus’ claim to a triumph toward the end. Governors of Asia in this period were regularly praetorian. The crisis in the East had been developing and was known since 104 (Diod. 36.3, referring to Bithynia), and trials, like that of Norbanus, were sometimes deferred for several years after the alleged offenses until political conditions were ripe. The rank of Rutilius is a good point, though conceivably the claims of friendship and long association may have overridden those of rank. On balance, it appears from Asconius 15C most probable that it was earlier in his year as consul that Scaevola had renounced his province before he vetoed his colleague’s claim to a triumph. If so, he was governor of Asia as a praetorian province in 98 or 97 (MRR 2.7; Nicolet, Ordre equestre 545-546; Sumner, GRBS 19, 1978, 147; and also in favor of 98 or 97, B. A. Marshall, Athenaeum 54, 1976, 117-130). (Broughton MRR III)
  • Consul 95 (Broughton MRR II) Expand
    • Cic. Verr. 2.2.122; Brut. 161, 229, 328; De Or. 1.170; 3.10; Fast. Ant., Degrassi 164f., and Fast. Cap., ibid., 55, 129, 478f.; Val. Max. 8.15.6; Obseq. 50; Chr. 354; Fast. Hyd.; Chr. Pasc.; Cassiod.; and on Crassus, Cic. De Or. 1. 112; 3.229; Val. Max. 4.5.4. They carried a law to send Italians resident at Rome back to their own towns, and set up a quaestio to enforce it (Cic. Corn. fr. 10, and Ascon. 67-68C; De Or. 2.257; Sest. 30; Balb. 48 and 54; Off. 3.47; Brut. 63; Sall. Hist. 1.20M; Schol. Bob. 129 Stangl). Crassus defended Q. Caepio from some unknown charge (Cic. Brut. 102), and repressed raiders in Cisalpine Gaul, but his demand for a triumph was vetoed by his colleague (Cic. Inv. 2.111, Consul; Pis. 62, and Ascon. 15 C; Val. Max. 3.7.6, Proconsul; see 94, Promagistrates). Scaevola resigned his province (Ascon. 15C; cf. Balsdon, CR 51 [1937] 8-10). (Broughton MRR II)
  • Pontifex Maximus 82 (Rüpke 2005) Expand
    • Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius succeeded Q. Mucius Scaevola. Killed by Damasippus (see Praetors) a the command of the Consul Marius (Cic. Rosc. Amer. 33; De Or. 3.10; Brut. 311; ND 3.80; Att. 9.15.2; Diod. 37.29.5; 38.17; Liv. Per. 86; Vell. 2.26.2; Lucan 2.126129; App. BC 1.88; Flor. 2.9.21; Oros. 5.20.4; Augustin. CD 3.28). (Broughton MRR II)